Yesterday we noted that we still hadn’t received a reply to a complaint we made to the BBC about a false assertion by David Dimbleby on Question Time over six weeks ago, despite the fact that it’s only supposed to take 10 working days.
By coincidence we got the reply today, 36 days late, and it wasn’t worth the wait.
This evening’s Question Time saw one of the most incident-packed passages on the show in recent memory. From left to right onscreen the panellists were Paul Marshall (hedge fund manager, head of a chain of academy schools and co-author of the Lib Dems’ infamous “Orange Book”), Alex Salmond, Tory minister Greg Clark, Labour’s shadow home secretary Andy Burnham and right-wing think-tanker Jill Kirby.
We’ll let you watch for yourself.
We’d hoped to be bringing you in-depth analysis of the Scottish Labour manifesto by now, readers, but a couple of hours after their launch event there’s still no sign of it anywhere (we’ve checked their website, Facebook page and Twitter feed, all blank).
So we’re going to nip out to the shops for a bit. In the meantime, here’s some footage we recorded of the fantastic live stream of the launch the party put out.
We have high hopes.
Well, high-ish.
We’re looking forward to the publication of the Scottish Labour manifesto for next month’s election, which is due to be published on Wednesday, just eight days before the vote. We confidently anticipate that it will definitively clear up a few issues we’re still not absolutely sure of the branch office’s position on.
For a day or two, at least.
Considering we’re only eleven days from a general election, there’s remarkably little politics coverage in the Sunday papers today. Most of what there is is in the Sunday Herald, which has a substantial (and quite entertaining) interview with Kezia Dugdale and another two pages devoted to what’s essentially spluttering attempted justification of its shambolic front-page lead from last week.
We’re not going to go into it in depth, as James Kelly on Scot Goes Pop! has already had a close look and made a pretty fair assessment. But for want of anything more interesting to talk about, and in the wake of some depressing Twitter conversations with people who apparently STILL don’t understand either the Holyrood electoral system or basic arithmetic, we’re going to have one more wade in the list-vote debate.
You might want to see if there’s football on or something.
With fears growing that hundreds of jobs may be lost in the Clyde shipyards as the UK government slowly backs away from the commitments made during the independence referendum campaign, Kezia Dugdale was full of righteous outrage last night.
But note how delicately that tweet is phrased. The clear implication – while not directly stated – is that only the Tories were responsible for the promises.
Is that the case, though?
We might just not post anything again until the second referendum.
We’ve noted on numerous occasions previously that one of this site’s prime functions is merely to remember things – to serve as a repository of fact which can be referred to when politicians or the media try to mislead people about what happened in the past. It was a thought we were struck by again on reading The Times this morning.
Because as we beheld Kenny Farquharson’s account of the SNP’s manifesto launch, and how its emphasis on the word “RE-ELECT” was unfamiliar and “very different” to their last Holyrood manifesto launch, we were sure that wasn’t how we recalled it.
So we checked.
This site has never told readers how to vote in Scottish elections and never will, partly because its editor has no vote there and doesn’t have to live with the consequences whoever wins. (Something that ISN’T true about independence, in which case Wings would relocate to Scotland, which is why we freely express a firm view on that.)
It’s in that context that we make the following observations about next month’s vote.
Copies ordered to date: 38,521
.
The meaning of the word “reform” has taken something of a battering in Scotland this year. First the Joseph Rowntree Reform Trust decided that it meant “bailing out a known liar in direct contravention of our own stated rules”. And today we have the strange case of the Electoral Reform Society.
“Make seats match votes”. Nobody could disagree with that, right?
Wings Over Scotland is a thing that exists.
